Politics
Oliver Barker-Vormawor Criticizes NIB’s Invitation To Abronye DC, Warns Against Misuse Of State Security Resources
Barker-Vormawor also expressed skepticism about the NIB’s intentions, hinting that the invitation might be an attempt to intimidate rather than investigate. “If it is, however, a shadow attempt to intimidate, which is what I take it for, I rebuke it!” he declared. He cautioned against the misuse of power, drawing parallels to past abuses and warning that such actions could tarnish the government’s reputation. “Do not be led astray by power. I spoke against the midget’s abuse; I won’t tolerate the same from a giant!” he added.
Oliver Barker-Vormawor, the convener of the Fix the Country Movement, has expressed strong disapproval of the National Investigations Bureau (NIB) inviting Kwame Baffoe, popularly known as Abronye DC, the Bono Regional Chairman of the New Patriotic Party (NPP), to substantiate allegations of corruption against President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo. Barker-Vormawor argues that the tone of the invitation appears confrontational and raises concerns about the potential misuse of state security resources to intimidate individuals, even those whose political views may be deemed disagreeable.
In a Facebook post, Barker-Vormawor shared his thoughts on the matter, stating, “I have seen a letter from the NIB (I prefer BNI) inviting Abronye DC to substantiate allegations of corruption against the current president. Might be just me, but the tone to me seems confrontational rather than intended to elicit support to investigate criminal allegations.”
He emphasized his disagreement with any attempts to use state security apparatus to suppress individuals, regardless of their political affiliations or the nature of their statements. “I disagree with any attempts to use state security resources to muzzle; even people we find disagreeable or who may, by their politics, disgust you,” he wrote. Barker-Vormawor suggested that if the state genuinely believed in the plausibility of Abronye’s claims, the approach should have been more collaborative and respectful, treating him as someone aiding in the investigation of potential crimes.
Barker-Vormawor also expressed skepticism about the NIB’s intentions, hinting that the invitation might be an attempt to intimidate rather than investigate. “If it is, however, a shadow attempt to intimidate, which is what I take it for, I rebuke it!” he declared. He cautioned against the misuse of power, drawing parallels to past abuses and warning that such actions could tarnish the government’s reputation. “Do not be led astray by power. I spoke against the midget’s abuse; I won’t tolerate the same from a giant!” he added.
The activist further urged restraint and adherence to due process, emphasizing that freedom of speech protects even unpleasant or controversial statements. “Speech rights protect displeasant speech. Let the civil process cure injuring speech; not a BNI officer!” he stated. Barker-Vormawor’s comments highlight the delicate balance between investigating serious allegations and ensuring that state power is not wielded to suppress dissent or intimidate political opponents.
His critique underscores broader concerns about the role of state security agencies in political matters and the importance of maintaining transparency, fairness, and respect for civil liberties in addressing allegations of corruption or misconduct. As the situation unfolds, Barker-Vormawor’s remarks serve as a reminder of the need for accountability and the careful use of state resources to uphold democratic principles.
